Posted on 03/18/2007 2:40:41 PM PDT by SmithL
TRAPHILL, N.C. (AP) -- Search teams combed mountain terrain Sunday for a 12-year-old Boy Scout who disappeared during an outing.
About 10 scouts and the adult leaders of Troop 230, from Greensboro, noticed that Michael Auberry was missing between 12:30 p.m. and 1 p.m. Saturday in Stone Mountain State Park, officials said.
The troop had gone on a hike earlier Saturday, and the boy and an adult stayed behind, said David Bauer, a ranger with the Blue Ridge Parkway. It was not immediately clear why they stayed behind.
After the troop returned and ate lunch with Michael and the adult, the troop noticed the boy was missing from camp. Searchers found part of his mess kit less than a mile away late Saturday,
(Excerpt) Read more at ap.washingtontimes.com ...
I'm pleased you read the rules, but with all due respect you are wrong. The Troop could have left a second Scout with the first Scout and the leader. Four leaders minimum is preferred for trips like this so that two leaders could be left if necessary. There are circumstances that would merit having a single adult with a single Scout, but this is not one.
Consult the other trained leaders on this thread. Leaving one Scout behind with one leader, because the Scout didn't want to go on the hike, violates BSA policy.
You are correct that I misread the article and did not realize that the Troop had returned to find the Scout and leader in the campsite before the Scout disappeared.
Youth protection is as much about protecting the adults as the youth -- it's more difficult for a youth to make an unmerited accusation if two adults are present. Merit badge classes, Scoutmaster conferences, and similar interactions with Scouts are held in the view of others, or in the presence of two adults.
This situation in North Carolina may be a tragedy. It may be nobody's fault other than the Scout's -- but Troops that skirt one safety rule often skirt others.
Can I quote you chapter and verse of the entire Guide to Safe Scouting? No, I'd have to pull the current guide. But I've been trained (more than ten times in Youth Protection; Council requirements for summer camp, National requirements for multiple Philmont and Sea Base trips), I've chaired the Council's Risk Management Committee, I serve as legal advisor to the Health and Safety Committee, I've been a Council Commissioner, and have been interviewed on appropriate Safe Scouting regulations in connection with taking Troops to two National Scout Jamborees, the upcoming World Scout Jamboree, and an international trip.
You DON'T leave one Scout behind with one leader for the sheer convenience of it. If three leaders went with the rest of the Troop, then one of them should have stayed behind.
NONE of that may have had anything to do with this Scout's disappearance. I've certainly had Scouts with the uncanny ability to walk away from a campsite despite knowing that the buddy system was allowed.
My Son's troop is extremely meticulous about this.
Yep. Been there, done that. On a three-leader summer camp excursion, I've also awakened my son in the middle of the night so that he could walk with me to take a Scout to the infirmary, leaving two leaders (awake) in camp; my son was permitted to return to the campsite with me, one-on-one.
There are circumstances when one-on-one contact is necessary, such as a two-Scout, two-adult trip where a Scout or leader is injured and left behind. I'd send a Scout/leader crew for help.
In this case, if there is a second Scout or a second leader who can stay behind, then he should have done so.
I've prattled too long about the Guide to Safe Scouting. What's really important here is finding a lost Scout.
The BSA rules you read on the net are the tip of the iceburg -- there's an entire Guide to Safe Scouting that's updated regularly, together with a dual video component.
Prayer bump
I think the setup is overkill and is not a good example to make. It teaches that the least common denomenator is that an adult is a closet child molester. In the old days, folks certainly knew about them, and they were always properly demeaned. It is never a good thing to teach,or to imply in any way, that if one of your buddies dad's, or their freinds has a lone discussion with you about something, that their are, or that there is good cause to believe, that ulterior motives exist.
Those positions of authority can't be used for abuse, if there's clear and open condemnation and instruction given regarding molesting, at troop meetings at least. I see no reason to encourage and perpetrate suspicion regarding the motives and intent of adults in general. That doesn't foster the idea that adults are trustworthy, loyal, honorable, ect... It fosters the idea that know one is trustworthy, loyal and honorable, and they all need to be watched like a hawk.
I'm with you on the two-deep leadership issue.
Frankly, folks, you could just as easily call the "youth protection" rules "adult protection". One adult can be left with more than one Scout, but not with just one Scout unless that Scout is his or her child (or there's a legal guardian relationship). That provides obvious protection for the Scouts, but it also gives the adult a witness in case the Scout makes a false accusation because he is angry that the Scouter refused to let him carry the 10" sheath knife his Dad gave him or backed up the Patrol Leader when it was the Scout's turn to clean up the spaghetti pot last night and he tried to duck out on it.
Children often have no sense of proportion. They don't have an appreciation of the long-term effects of their actions and have no clue what a thoughtless accusation made in anger can have on an adult. This can be especially true of a child that has led a somewhat privileged and indulged life. I've had a few, and they get pretty unreasonable when they find themselves in an environment where there are actual rules that are enforced by punishment if you violate them; where "no" means "no" and no amount of wheedling will get around it.
The reporter on Fox this morning seemed to imply that the boy did not want to be on the trip. Two or more of his friends who were to have gone on the trip did not end up being on it. Maybe he was not participating in group activities and somebody had to stay behind with him.
Frankly, folks, you could just as easily call the "youth protection" rules "adult protection". One adult can be left with more than one Scout, but not with just one Scout unless that Scout is his or her child (or there's a legal guardian relationship). That provides obvious protection for the Scouts, but it also gives the adult a witness in case the Scout makes a false accusation because he is angry that the Scouter refused to let him carry the 10" sheath knife his Dad gave him or backed up the Patrol Leader when the Scout tried to duck out on his turn to clean up the spaghetti pot last night.
Children often have no sense of proportion. They don't have an appreciation of the long-term effects of their actions and have no clue what a thoughtless accusation made in anger can have on an adult. This can be especially true of a child that has led a somewhat privileged and indulged life. I've had a few, and they get pretty unreasonable when they find themselves in an environment where there are actual rules that are enforced by punishment if you violate them; where "no" means "no" and no amount of wheedling will get around it.
Nothwithstanding that, another Scout (or another leader, if that would have still left two or more with the hiking group) should have stayed behind with the Scout who didn't want to participate. I understand that his disappearance did not occur when he was alone with a leader. We are (I am) just off on a tangent to point out that even if the Scout wanted to stay behind, TWO people needed to stay with him. Preferably two adults, but two Scouts and one leader would work.
Most importantly, the Scout is lost and I pray they find him well under the circumstances, and soon.
You are right. Every training session I've attended points out that the rules are about "adult protection" as well as "youth protection." Let's find that Scout!
My husband was once at a Cub Scouts event and went to get something from his car ... only to have a predatory single mom follow him off into the dark! After that, he said that he'd always take at least two Cub Scouts with him if he walked anywhere out of sight :-).
A report on the NC Forum (knows somebody who knows somebody ...) says that the missing boy has some "learning issues," which might explain why he has apparently not followed basic wilderness safety procedures. (Stop where you are and make noise!)
On the other hand, so many boys are "diagnosed" with "learning issues" that it could just mean he's hard to get along with. Either way, the adults should not have just let him take off.
They quit following me when I'd ask if they'd rather be in charge of the Pinewood Derby or host the Blue & Gold Dinner.
; )
LOL!
My first thought was a learning issue. It almost sounded like a kid we had. He always wanted to sleep in and missed events. Then he got mad because we didn't wait on him. Maybe he got mad and he decided to hine on his own or "walk home".
I have a 12 year-old Boy Scout at home myself. I guess we need to talk.
Trivia: He attends Mendenhall Middle School which I attended the year before we were bused across town.
If the adult was not one of the boy's parents, that is a MAJOR breach of the Boy Scout rules! There are ALWAYS supposed to be at least two adults when a lone boy is present; for the boy's protection.
Wow, that's an impressive resume. Thank you for your service to our youth.
I've had the pleasure of serving as Master of Ceremonies for an event to recognize 50 years of service as Scoutmaster for a local Scouter at his temple. At a National Meeting, I was able to meet and speak with a gentleman who had been Scoutmaster of his Tennessee troop for . . . 75 consecutive years. He was about 97, quick witted as you can imagine, and only complained that he could not longer go backpacking. I wish I could remember the number of Scouts who earned the rank of Eagle under his leadership -- somewhere way north of 400 if I remember correctly.
As hard as you may try, I'm afraid you often get more out of serving as a Scout leader that you are able to give. Flatly speaking: it's fun.
Changing the subject: Notice how many "facts" the news media has been quick to post that have now been contradicted? I've seen two different NC State Parks listed as the site of the camp. I've read he didn't enjoy hiking; I've read he didn't like Scouting; I've read he wanted to sleep in; I've read he loved Scouting and camping (except in the cold).
From my time in the Shining Rock Wilderness along the Blue Ridge Parkway, I know there are spots you can walk fifteen yards off a marked trail and be in the Forest Primeval. Dense growth many feet higher than your head. 40-degree inclines.
There's a good reason to take a whistle with you when hiking and to stop, sit in one place, and blow three-whistle bursts when you first think you may be lost (or as Daniel Boone would say, "confused").
A new statement about the Troop having lunch together has been inserted -- but it does not say that whether Michael was present at the lunch.
It may be an insignificant change, but it alarms me that a specific statement that the Scout was seen at lunch has been replaced with less specific terms.
Based on my experience, if the Scout wasn't at lunch, then there's a chance he changed his mind (or awoke -- the newer stories say he was sleeping in) and went to find his hiking Troop. Of course, that's all speculation.
Let's find this Scout, unharmed!
And what was wrong with the single mom? Didn't she know your hubby was married to THE Tax-Chick? She had no chance!
In retrospect, I feel better about the times I wondered if a single Mom was coming on to one of our leaders.
Hope all the Boy Scouts, Cub Scouts, and Girl Scouts in the Tax-Chick household are well. After this summer's World Scout Jamboree, I'll likely have some more temporary International patches for your brood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.